Xeon + Quadro card VS ten-core i9 + GTX1080 Ti card

M

martynmoore

Bronze Level Poster
Hi guys

I need help. My seven-year-old PC Specialist build is struggling with 4k video editing. It's time to spend some cash.

I edit HD and 4k video with Adobe Premiere Pro. The PC Specialist recommended build for Adobe Premiere Pro uses a Xeon E3 processor (quad core E3 1240V6) together with a PNY Quadro P5000 graphics card. I'm not sure when PC Specialist configured this machine.

For similar money, or less, I could have a ten-core i9 processor and a GTX 1080 Ti graphics cards.

Which should I choose, and why?

The future of film-making in the east midlands is in your hands...

Martyn
 
M

martynmoore

Bronze Level Poster
Hi Oussebon

Thanks very much for your advice. I'm expecting to have to spend £3000 to £3500. It's a business purchase, so reliability and future-proofing are more important than cost. My current machine was £1500 seven years ago, so I'd hope for as long again if possible. I can't see me adopting 8k in less than five years, but who can tell how fast cameras will progress?

I was surprised to see the PC Specialist configuration for a video editing workstation using a quad core Xeon and Quadro card and wondered if it had been configured before the i9 and GTX1080Ti were available. But when speaking to PC Specialist on the phone today, I was told that the Xeon and Quadro combo had been specified in conjunction with Adobe and that was the best spec for the grunt work of video editing. The performance advantages of the i9 and GTX card would benefit gamers, but not video editors.

This has led me to wonder if the faster components might sacrifice reliability for very little performance gain, due to the different nature of the tasks. I remember my current machine was quite highly strung at first, and took a while to find a stable configuration.

Anyway, I appreciate you sharing your thoughts.
 
Oussebon

Oussebon

Multiverse Poster
The performance advantages of the i9 and GTX card would benefit gamers, but not video editors.
Click to expand...
That's total garbage. It's actually wrong on both counts - the extra performance is a massive benefit to video editors, while the i9 is a bad choice for pure gaming.....

Pretty shocked they came out with that.

For CPUs, note: https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/a...-Performance-Core-i9-7940X-7960X-7980XE-1034/

e.g ~30% improved rendering/export performance for projects with a 12+ core CPU over a 6 core CPU.

This has led me to wonder if the faster components might sacrifice reliability for very little performance gain, due to the different nature of the tasks.
Click to expand...
I would suggest it is the other way around. That for notional improvements in reliability you're sacrificing vast amounts of performance.

Puget haven't even bothered benching Xeons. And lots of youtubers, whose living relies entire on the videos they produce, use i9/GTX type combos over Xeons and quadros.

That's not to say there is no point to those, but in your budget and needs I'm not seeing where the benefit of them is VS the massive performance loss for your limited budget.
 
Last edited:
M

martynmoore

Bronze Level Poster
Those Puget numbers are really useful. Thanks. I was wondering just how far I should go with the number of cores in an i9 processor. From the tables you've shared, the performance difference between 10 cores and 18 wouldn't justify the extra cost. But I am going to see a huge improvement over my current i7 quad core and GTX750. I'd be going from 24GB RAM to 32, too.

I don't want to criticise PCS. They have been really supportive for seven years and I am certainly going to buy from them again. But I was advised as above. As long as my current machine keeps plodding along, I'll edit 4k using proxies and carry on my research.

Thanks again.
 
Oussebon

Oussebon

Multiverse Poster
You could always upgrade in stages. For instance, get a new GPU for your old system which could give a huge performance boost. And then when you are ready for a new system, get one without a GPU and swap that over.
 
M

martynmoore

Bronze Level Poster
That would work, too, I guess.

I'm wondering how many more years I can expect to get out of my i7 960 @ 3.2GHz and its dusty motherboard. After swapping the original HDD for a SSD and adding extra HDDs to keep raw footage and exported files separate, then upgrading the GPU and RAM, this lovely old workhorse is beginning to feel a bit like 'Trigger's broom' (old Only Fools and Horses reference).

You know how exciting it is to 'start again', don't you? That is part of the dilemma...
 
Oussebon

Oussebon

Multiverse Poster
Hmm.. Well, while a 1080 ti could still be an upgrade over the GTX 750 even in that setup, I can definitely see why you'd want to upgrade from your i7 960.

With workstation components vs consumer, it's worth pointing out that you seem to have been working with your 7 year old consumer spec without it going wrong enough to wreck your video editing work. :)
 
M

martynmoore

Bronze Level Poster
That's very true, Oussebon. I remember it was very temperamental at first, and took a few weeks to settle down, as I worked out the best way to use three HDDs and where to put paging files and caches, etc. Then it settled down to a long run of stability before I burned through two lower-spec graphics cards in three months. The GTX750 has been solid since day one and after the Windows 10 upgrade came along, the machine has never missed a beat. Unfortunately, the creators edition update has created lots of bugs for my Wacom graphics tablet. But the old box will make a great family computer in the house, replacing my 2008 iMac, that won't take the latest Aplle OS any more. I lead a complicated life...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top